Dumbass republicans... God, I hate those guys. No offense to those who support them, you're just misinformed, in my opinion. The actual GOP is who I hate.
@UGLYSTIKCOLIN well, them well educate, upwardly mobile, younger type folks could who watch Countdown could watch Fox, but they have too much respect for themselves to waste time with that crap.
Wow, I can't believe Fox News said these things that Keith is reading from a transcript. But its true. And to think I though Fox was fair and balanced.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Keith Olbermann is an asshole. He sucks and he sucked when he was at ESPN otherwise he would still be their employed at ESPN. I guess only Keith knows why he's still not ther !
Do Research, keith has been getting paid a notable increase in salary since the very first day he left ESPN. "CountDown with keith Olbermann" Its kinda like a team wanting to keep a free agent but a different team is willing to pay him more if this were the case that player would have been keith olbermann. Engage your brain before you type please
Olbermann is like a retarded Marx. He and Franken should start their own show together on Comedy Central. It's like they believe in all the same things Marx did, but they just look really retarded. Hope I didn't hurt any of you drones' feelings! Idiots!
Oh, you sad sad little Texas neo con. How hard it must be for you to know that your guy fucked up so bad that America went to the other extreme in hopes of fixing that mess. While you burn some lean calories taxing that tiny brain of yours, thinking up some, no doubt classy come back filled with profanity, ponder this. Do you even realize just how truly irrelevant you and your peers are now?
WOW! Neo con, huh? What does that mean, exactly? Looks like we are relevant enough to put a damper on Hussein's plan to socialize America! Go get in line for your hand out, you drone! Don't forget to pay your taxes!
Keith wishes he was on a program whom people actually watch. I think Keith has mentioned Bill O'Reilly's name about a million times. Heck he should just call him up and go suck one off since he is sooooo envious about him. I tried to watch this filth but I became so depressed that I killed myself. To bad it was a dud. Maybe Keith can show me...
Keith is on a program that is watched...it is more popular with the young,the well educated and the upper class...just like Senator Obama was during the campaign season. It has not taken Keith long to cut into Bill-o's ratings and viewership. Only trash watches FOX and the clowns over there who do nothing but spew nonsense and hatred.
Yeah right the young, well educated and the upper class watch more Fox News than Keiths ranting news media (if that's what you want to call it) by the way did you see all those young voters whom could not even guess what party is in the Congress and Senate right now. They all said Republicans, if that is well educated than your right. Did you also know that Keith had been fired by MSNBC a couple years ago before the election or not? Your last sentence says it all, hatred and calling people names
I know that some mccain supporters thrive off hate but last night showed them with clear vision that the majority of america is not having it. Obama commanded 43% of the white vote to mccains 55%. So lets stop this black and white shit once and for all ok. Alot of black people and other minirities cried last night because the good white people of this country had their say :) I am so so proud of my country and always have been :) wow obama09
I'm a good "individual" and I still voted for McCain. Does that make me bad? No, what makes me bad is the fact that knocked somebody out because they wouldn't get out of my face because I wouldn't let them get infront of me in convience store line because they said "white boy you need to go somewhere" when nothing was said to them at all.
HEY man, I'm sorry that some black dude invaded your space in that manner. There would be no excuse for that behavior no matter what but why are you blaming black people for this or obama? I'm not sure what you are getting at here "my friend" let us know ok.
I don't blame Obama. I like the guy personally, I just don't agree with his policies. But it's his supporters that infuriate me. Yes they have the right to vote for him, but they do not have the right to patronize me because they "think" that since someone of the same colour is in a high power that they can label people for no true reason. If I am a racist then yes he has all right to call me out on it, but that's only if he has his facts.
Slipknotdraken,I understand you completely but voted against mccains policies. The word "racism" gets used by blacks alot times for no reason. I can tell you that certain instincts come with being oppressed or growing up around oppressed people. I think we all just need to respect each others opinions because when it's all said and done. obama and mccain are still on the same team.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
The BIG difference is Fox gets opposing viewpoints from liberal guests. Keith is a one man show. He gets puppets on his show that agree with all he says. His faggot ass is too scared to have anyone who disagrees with him. It's obviously NOT the SAME DAMN THING... It's obvious you're the ignorant one here!!
I have to agree with the title, Keith O some of your stuff is of the Worlds Worst.
Keith O, get some guts. You obviously have earned enough money to support yourself for the rest of your life. Get off of MSNBC, and start actually voicing your own opinions with your angry voice, instead of being a puppet for the democratic party which is owned by hmmmm? I'm sure you know.
I don't remember Colin Powell being hated by blacks. In fact, most of the blacks I know like him, especially since he left Bush (psst...I'm black). But stop putting us in a group! Everyone has their own opinion.
YES PEOPLE!!! STOP putting all blacks and all whites into just 2 groups and saying we all have to think alike, just because of the amount of melanin in our skin. How stupid is that?!
to iam70: They were not proud of Powell for what he refused to do early on. That was to denounce Bush and his cronies as liers and theives. They (blacks) are proud of the man not his social misadventuress. Have a greatday!
I'm thinking the worst and most virulent racists would be all the lefties who mocked Colin Powell when he was a member of the Bush cabinet. You know, people like Jimmy Kimmel and Bill Maher, who said stuff like "I'm blacker than Colin Powell". Nice.
Don't you love it when (liberal) white people get to decide which black people are "black enough"? It's enough to make one hearken back to the 1930's and those loony government classifications for blacks like "quadroons, octaroons and mullatos".
Big mistake by the desperate Democrats to gain votes. The only thing that getting an endorsement by a retired Party turncoat will do is send a clear message to White Dems to switch parties because of race, as Colin Powell did. Bad strategic move in such a close race. This will also damage Colin Powell's reputation. The only thing that he will be able to endorse now is Viagra or Depends. BTW, the race is VERY close...the liberal main stream media manufactured poles are not. Big surprise on Nov.4.
charity doesnt provide enough aid to effectively help all those in need you know why??? BECAUSE ITS CHARITY people give only if they want to or not you have to give to the government and those people with almost nothing have to give as well what little they may have so its the governments job to make sure they have something to give.
If you really want information on the situation effecting us all see Ron Paul and Mumia Abu Jamal's take on the economy on my page! Wake up America this is not a race issue! Pass along
The Republican party spent $150,000 in donated money in 1 month for Sarah Palin's (& her families) Neiman Marcus wardrobe, & now struggles to pay for their campaign costs! (I guess she's an example of what a "real" Americanis). Hockey mom & Joe the plumber my ass. This gives a glimpse how a GOP administration would fritter away taxpayer money. So how is it drinking that champagne that McCain thinks a "real" American drinks? the GOP has gone the way of Jerry Springer & The Beverly Hillbillies!!
AntiConformist911, I won't say Powel is only endorsing Obama because of race, but it is a possibility, especially when considering the huge difference in the political ideals of each. Also, there are those who will say without flinching that many whites won't vote for obama based on race, but it is somehow rediculous to assume that many blacks are voting FOR him for the same reason!? That logic itself is racist. Race with disregard for policy plays a part both ways, lets not lie to ourselves.
"I won't say Powel is only endorsing Obama because of race, but it is a possibility, especially when considering the huge difference in the political ideals of each."
How many other black candidates has Powell endorsed? And can you list those "differences in political ideals" please cause I can't find ANY.
The relevent question is - how many DEMOCRAT candidates has Powel endorsed? Because the only similarities between the two men are racial similarities. Now, again, I'm not accusing Powel of anything, I really do respect him, I'm saying its ironic that Obama happens to be the one democrat Powel aligns himself with. And, sini if you "can't find any" politically ideological differences between their two careers than you must be searching with your eyes closed.
"Because the only similarities between the two men are racial similarities."
That's not true. Have you listened to Powell's endorsement? They agree on almost everything. Powell list a lot of compelling real reasons --none of which have to do with race. There's more to a candidate than just party affiliation. Those who want to dismiss Powell's endorsement as racial biased are trying to hide the fact that the Republican ticket is so awful Powell really had no choice.
I don't deny that McCain is a deuche and the Republicans are worthless, but I'm talking about more than the endorsement speech. I'm talking about Powel's history and what he has endorced and advanced throughout his career. He has always held conservative ideals (the GOOD kind) where people make themselves what they want to be, not what the government can make of them. Powel trully is a self made success story. That is America. Obama declares that we need the gov to do it for us. That's socialism
"or whose mission is to provide the service you expect them to." Again, name one thing that the gov does efficiently where we trully get our money's worth. A private business is MUCH more interested in givin you the service you expect than is the government. if a company doesn't give the customers what they want, they lose their customers. The gov isn't under such pressure because they know we have no other gov to turn to unless we leave! Where do you get better service? A restaurant or the DMV?
...also think about how silly private competing DMVs would be. They'd have to pay for advertising, shareholder's profits etc... your driver's license would cost $200 dollars but hey service would be with a smile! And what would be the benefit? You could take your business to the DMV across town with the $169 license sale?
I guess Olbermann has to admit Fux was right huh? And what the fuck was "racist" about what they said!? You can't point out that the guy was dancing to hip hop at an African party!? So now making reference to someone celebrating their African heritage is racist! Is it racist to point out a Kennedy marching in the St Pat's Day Parade? Fuckin Olbermann has become a total hypocrit cocksuker! Fuck him! Hopefully he gets cancer in his eyes real soon!
InvestigatorDave Your opinion is your opinion..but judging by the backlach your receiving for making that stupid comment I can safely say your wrong on this one..Most of us agree something has to be done about our present health care practices whether you believe so or not!
I did not make a stupid comment, and someone who doesn't know "your" from "you're" shouldn't be throwing around the word "stupid".
The backlash is you, Sinistar, and 1911arthur. Are we going to use this as the basis for a decision to implement socialized medicine? Three people?! Does it necessarily mean that the lone dissenting voice is "wrong"?
The "most of us" to whom you refer (again, 3 people) may believe something needs to be done, but fortunately you 3 can't force this.
Great! Now (you are) my grammer teacher? The Backlash is in the polls,The new registered voters coming out in record numbers the economy YOU see 3 people, I see people (expecially young people) showing an interest in a presidential election(in particular this presidential race) WHY? I think you already know..
To my knowledge, I have not exchanged posts with you, so I'm not your "grammer teacher". If you'd like me to be, I will (let's start with "grammar" with an "a").
The polls you mention NOW are not the backlash Wood mentioned earlier about this thread. The polls you mention also show the 2 candidates in a race that is basically a tie when factoring the statistical margin of error. There are no polls showing Obama's health care policy being the reason for that.
"the "most of us" to whom you refer (again, 3 people) 3 people?"
You need to get your facts from more than just this forum. LOL I could get 4 of my friends to comment here and really screw with your statistics! You know who DOES poll representative samples? The AP. And according to their poll last year 65% of Americans said they would prefer a single-payer non-profit health insurance system to the one we have now.
As noted in the comment clearly directed to Wooddrow in direct response to his comment about the backlash on this series of posts. Perhaps before inserting yourself into an exchange you could read the whole exchange.
Those who favor the system you want do not understand the ramifications of it.
As a conservative, Rush is wrong! I want America to know that the NeoCons are not representatives of the republican party. People like Powell and Hagel are where most of us are. McCain use to be part of the conservative group but I don't know what he is doing running with the hateful NeoCons, except desperate people will say or do desperate things. That is why I voted for Obama in our early voting. It is time for change and if Obama gets too liberal we can always vote him out later in 2012.
We just don't want to be taxed on our health care premiums and we want the freedom to be able to buy into Medicare a more efficient non-profit system. McCain's plan, tax middle class more and still leave most people out --no thanks.
Republicans idea of health care reform is not to unplug Terri Schaivo. What a joke.
Hey, investigator dave, your really a dummy! It's not socilaized health care! Didn't you watch the debates? Obama's health proposal is that you keep your current plan at cheaper rates. If you don't have a plan, you can get the congessional plan. The same one congress has which is mainly, Blue Cross.
You've been brainwashed buddy. McSame lies, and you idiots believe his BS.
Before calling anyone a "dummy", you should make sure you know how to capitalize and use contractions.
If my healthcare is suddenly cheaper, under Obama, who is picking up the rest of the tab? If there are those without insurance, who suddenly get Obama's insurance, who is picking up their tab? And what of those who have no money to pay for health insurance -- who picks up their tab?
If your answer to any question is "Gov't", then is is socialized.
That's just it... there is no "rest of the tab" The rest of the tab is what's not being paid to shareholders in the form of profit dividends marketing lobbyists, etc. Some things work better when socialized. Should we have competing private military(s)?
The way 1911 explained it, is not how you are explaining it. He says that we get what we have now, just cheaper. Well, how did it suddenly get cheaper? Who is subsidizing?
The military argument is a red herring. The Constitution provides for a military to protect the country. The Prez is listed as CIC. There can't be competing military(s). And the military is not socialized.
Nothing works better when the gov't runs it. See former USSR for examples, or current DMV.
The military IS socialized! Is it a private company? I see you have 1 example of a country... do you have any examples of a private DMV that works better? The DMV works just fine. Did you not get a drivers license or what? Health insurance works better when socialized see EVERY OTHER INDUSTRIALIZED COUNTRY for examples. By what we have now he means the same doctors and providers...The change is just with insurance --who writes the checks.
You are a dummy..So what you think (you'er) a good speller, you lack basic common sense or (you'er) an fool. QUESTION? who picks up the tab for Fanie Mae Freddie Mac? Bail out people with money..Let struggling americans fend for themselves..Do me and others a favor KILL YOUR MUTHER F*CKIN SELVES PLEASE!!!!!
In summary: Yes, I spell well, and my grammar is pretty good too. Your posts are hard to read due to lack of proper spelling and grammar. You should think about that.
The US taxpayers will pick up bailout of Fannie and Freddie. But you know that. What I doubt you know is how the mess was created, who was responsible, and the consequences of not bailing them out.
"Kill myself"? Really? Is that how far this exchange has degenerated? Wow. I thought you had more on the ball than that.
Yes, healthcare is a right! McSame's healthcare might as well be THE EMERGENCY ROOM, as it covers, nothing! No pre-existing, nothing! It's a freakin joke!
Obama's is way better and way cheaper and covers,EVERYTHING! It's the same plan he has. The same that every congressman has!
Palin, is the ultimate slap in the face! She's a freakin dummy!!!!!
Please work with wooddrow to find anywhere in the Bill of Rights where it is stated that Healthcare is a right. When you find that, I'll start believing it is a right. When you can't find it, you start believing that it is not a right.
There are lots of rights not stated in the first 10 amendments or not specifically enumerated anywhere in the Constitution. That doesn't mean they are not or shouldn't be rights. Before the civil rights act, Black people didn't have the same rights as white people in the constitution so would you have then argued that they shouldn't have those rights? We needed an amendment then, just like we do now.
So, when that ammendment is passed, and becomes a "right" it will by definition be a "right" (although never mentioned in the Constitution). Until such time as that happens, guess what? Not a right.
I really dont want to dig and hit you with facts..point is that I cant afford to work hard most my life to aquire a decent stanard of living.house car managible bills to have it take away because I got sick and the debt to pay for treatment forces me back to the drawing board, Thats Bullshit Obama didnt say he would socialize medicine but the Business practices are kill the same people that keep America going. Medicine and treatment have been Inflated to the point its un affordable
Wooddrow: There are other options to avoid having the disastrous outcome you describe without having to resort to socialized medicine.
Also, when the medical industry realizes that the gov't is footing the bill, they will try to raise costs. When the gov't says it will only pay $X not $Y, the medical industry will decide to provide less. Or, the gov't will agree to $Y and then ration the availability to the citizens when they start running out of money -- like in Canada.
Speculation..So I long term end is less exceptable than a short term end? What do you suggest then? continue forward and let us implode? if you cant fix us we cant work we cant maintain our expencies we are no longer productive in society, then we become your problem.Likley encountered late at night..while your walking from your car to your home with your family..So what do you suggest?
Speculation..So I long term end is less exceptable than a short term end? What do you suggest then? continue forward and let us implode? if you cant fix us we cant work we cant maintain our expencies we are no longer productive in society, then we become your problem.Likley encountered late at night..while your walking from your car to your home with your family..So what do you suggest? HAHA!
I don't know what "So I long term end is less exceptable than a short term end?" is supposed to mean. It doesn't make sense to me.
I do understand that you feel that if you get very sick, and if the gov't doesn't pay your medical expenses, you will become a criminal preying on people walking to their cars. If so, you can't be too sick, and you should be prepared to face the consequences of such an action.
What do I suggest? Take care of & protect yourself. Don't look to gov't to do it.
So you don't believe Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of happiness are inalienable rights because they aren't in the constitution?
Also in the constitution it is specifically stated that congress can pass laws which can grant rights all day long.
The "It's not in the constitution" argument is a childish sophomoric attempt to "amateur lawyer" your way around common sense. We're talking about moral human rights not what your narrow interpretation of a piece of paper says.
Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are inalienable rights, and are delineated in the declaration of independence -- the first document written to found our gov't. Sort of a preamble to the preamble.
Yes, congress can pass laws. Who said otherwise?
The constitution is the basis for the governance of our country. Interpretting it is what the Supreme Court does. Are they childish?
How do you define a "moral human right", and why doesn't it have to be constitutional to be US law?
THUS..Making us the ones that decide our fate..We like you your in, we dont like you your out (BUSH/MCCAIN) what part of my sentence didn't (did you not) understand?
I managed to muddle thru what you just wrote, and believe I understand it (despite your writing "style").
To a degree, you are right. We do have a role in deciding our fate as far as hoping we elect the right people to do in office what we wish. You're forgetting that you have much more influence over your fate in the actions you take everyday. Do you have the right insurance, enough of it, and if not, what have you done about that?
"Until such time as that happens, guess what? Not a right."
Then please explain the 9th amendment. It's to protect rights not enumerated in the constitution. Now if what you say is true, and there are no rights not enumerated in the constitution, what is the 9th amendment protecting? It would make no sense. So enough with the "it's not in the constitution" BS it's a stupid reason to not believe it's a right. Please find a less nonsensical reason --and I'll tear that down too.
9th: "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be contrued to deny or disparge others retained by the people." Do you believe health insurance was one of the ones they meant? Any person can obtain healthcare and health insurance. The gov't has not prevented that.
When you have torn down one of my arguments, I'll let you know. You seem to grade yourself very favorably.
If you mean (any) are you talking about Good Health Insurence? or patch work? because most of us receive patch work! Not the kind of benifits people that make over 250,000 or more a year! I am curious to know what kind of health care provider you have InvestigatorDave and how much does this insurence cost? can I get it? tell me..maybe Im just ill informed..so help me out..PLEASE you do seem content! I'd like to feel that way! you are healthy atleast..I guess?
"Any person can obtain healthcare and health insurance."
No any person can't. Only people who can afford it can. Where does it say "Life, Liberty...etc for those who can afford it?" The government provides legal council if you are accused of a crime and can't afford an attorney because we have a RIGHT to a fair trial. Not only people with money are supposed to have this right. Same with Life.
Yes any person can, but as with all good and services, you do have to pay for it. Do you give your work away? Actually, those who can't afford it get exactly the same care at hospitals you do. It's called charity care. If you can live with the shame, just tell the hospital you have no insurance or way to pay, and they write it off. The hospital eats it.
L,L..etc. means the gov't can't deny you those things (except in case of imprisonment). Doesn't say they'll buy it for you.
Uhh...sini... protecting a right DOES NOT mean having the government give you something, it means they cannot DENY you from having it! The 2nd tells the government they cannot deny our right to keep and bear arms, it doesn't say they have to buy guns for us! Ben Franklin put it best: "The Constitution gives you the right to PURSUE happiness, it is up to you to CATCH it!" Since when did government handouts become the American dream?
The government spends trillions of dollars providing me a free defense. I enjoy a free highway system, free fire and police protection... We get free things from the govt all day long. It doesn't say PERSUE life. Life is a right. You don't have to earn it or catch it or inherit it. And since you need air to live don't you have a right to air? How about water? It's not a far stretch to say if you need medication to live you have a right to that too.
The government provides firemen, police etc but they don't HAVE TO! Many places have only volunteer fire depts. Highways aren't "free" you pay for them with gas taxes, and that's a tax you don't have to pay if you don't own a car. Water too does not HAVE TO be provided. It is in big cities because the cities wouldn't exist otherwise but countless homes and businesses have well-water that has nothing to do with government. The only thing the government really HAS TO PROVIDE is access to voting.
Also NOTHING IS FREE! Every single thing that is provided by the government is paid for by TAXES! Some things, like building bridges and armies, the gov is good at. But how many things that they currently provide are complete clusterfucks? They have no business "providing" (see:CONTROLLING) many of the things they already do! Education comes to mind. If you want a completely worthless medical system that's your business but don't try to say the constitution mandates it. You're in over your head!
The Government HAS TO PROVIDE anything we say it does. It's there FOR US. It's a machine we created to and I quote "Provide for the welfare and common defence..." Government shouldn't run education? Who should? Enron? Halliburton? Does Holland have nothing but Private schools? How come their students score better at math and science and they have to speak 4 languages to graduate High School? Again you need to do some more investigating.
You have to understand that when you say the government should "provide" something you're also granting them the authority to CONTROL it. That's where the problems come in. And you can't seem to differentiate between local and federal gov'ts. Local govs should control schools, not the fed. And using other countries as examples doesn't work either. What is the population in Holland? NYC alone probably has more people. That's why such things work for them. The US is a whole different situation.
"... you're also granting them the authority to CONTROL it."
Look right now if you have health insurance, somebody who is not you is CONTROLING your health care dollars. Unless you're rich enough to pay out-of pocket for everything, Somebody is ALWAYS going to CONTROL your health care dollars. Do you want it to be somebody whose whole motive is to take as much for themselves as possible or whose mission is to provide the service you expect them to.
"somebody who is not you is CONTROLING your health care dollars." Granted, when you pay someone to provide a service it is up to them to do it properly. But the "control" is ultimately yours because you have a choice to continue employing them as your provider. If you don't like your med insurance provider, your barber, your babysitter, your mechanic, whatever you can bring your business to someone else.
"you can bring your business to someone else." Ok I choose to bring my health care business to a non profit nationalized health care provider. Who do I call for that?
Like I said, it's not like ordering a pizza. Health insurance companies can deny you for any reason. Good luck taking advantage of that competition if you have any existing condition. A full nationalized health care system could not deny anyone. That's the whole point.
"protecting a right DOES NOT mean having the government give you something, it means they cannot DENY you from having it!"
Uhh... eluminated, it depends on the right. In the 2nd Amendment it says "...shall not be abridged." which means as you say it can't be Denied.
The right to legal council, however isn't worded that way so the government DOES HAVE TO PROVIDE you with an attorney if you can't afford one. Some rights are positive rights and require an active role of the government.
when people are losing there life savings and houses to medical debt..it becomes a very important issues..fuck a credit of 5000..i pay taxes and i want my medical coverage to be a right even manditory as a tax paying american
You didn't mention race in the first post, so didn't think you thought it important. It isn't important. The Bush admin did not send Powell to the UN to push for a multi-national attack on Iraq because Powell was black. Race wasn't an issue in that action at all. His credibility came from many factors, but none related to Powell's race.
If socialized healthcare is your #1 priority, I don't understand your prioritization process. The US economy and national security are far more important than socialized healthcare, or any healthcare.
Obama might get it passed if elected, altho the last time someone tried this (Hillarycare), it failed to be enacted. Kerry ran with strong healthcare mssg, and he lost. Not sure it is that important, relatively, to voters.
investigatordave..and you a one of the few that dont get it..treating illness should not be a treated as a business..it should be a right to the people that keep this country moving forward US hard working americans.
I am having trouble understanding what you wrote, but will try to respond the best I can based upon what I believe you are trying to say.
Healthcare is a business. It is a very large part of the US economy. The Federal Gov't should never be in charge of that large of a piece of the economy. That is socialism, and antithetical to the Constitution and our values as Americans.
2nd: I would like you to provide me with any support you can find in US Bill of Rights that says healthcare is a right.
After writing "It seems to work just fine to me, especially since work in the health information field.", you probably should not be calling anyone "stupid".
Are you seriously comparing Medicare to HillaryCare, or socialized medicine like the Dems want?
I do not think that healthcare is a right. If you can find it in the Bill of Rights, then I'll change my mind.
Police and Fire Depts. are not a right either. Find that in the Bill of Rights, and I'll change my mind.
After writing: "I see jut how stupid Health Insuranc Companies are after all is used to work for one.", you probably should not be calling any entity "stupid". I hope, for the sake of the practice, you boss doesn't let you communicate with outside people & companies.
Given your writing "style" (as quoted in previous post), I would argue that your communication skills are not as good as you think they are. Nonetheless, I did not call you or anything "stupid". You, however, did. We can agree to disagree. At least we should disagree on facts.
As for finding a new driver, regardless of election outcome, we will have one. Bush is not running this year (surely you noticed). Obama would be the wrong replacement driver. We can't afford him.
...According to a study paid for by the Bush Administration, 20,000 Americans die each year because of lack of regular health insurance. That's more than all the Americans killed by terrorists ever --yet we're ok with spending trillions and forming new government (socialist) agencies to "fight terror." That's a problem with priorities.
Most Americans favor a single-payer non-profit health care system.
Enough with the Gov't agencies that are Fed agencies being described as socialized.
Most Americans will NOT want socialized medicine when they find out that it is basically one-size-fits-all, and reduces choice, and will HAVE TO ration care. Besides, some Americans do not have insurance because they do not want it -- now you're going to make them pay for something (thru taxes) that they don't want. Single payer means no competition; degraded services and standard prices. Where's the freedom?
"...when they find out that it is basically one-size-fits-all, and reduces choice, and will HAVE TO ration care...(bla bla bla)."
Except none of that is true. With medicare (a government run socialized program, you can see any doctor you want and not get turned down for and existing condition. It's more efficient pays better and is less expensive. What degradation in service? Some Americans don't want police either should we do away with that? Your arguments are ridiculous.
With Medicare you most certainly cannot see any doctor you wish. Some doctors do not accept Medicare and will refuse service to those who wish to use that for payment.
It does pay, but not better than all the other insurance out there.
Degradation in service because of the rationed care that will come with it, also the retardation of innovation in the medical field bcse companies will not be able to afford R&D.
When medicare is available for All of us then All doctors will accept it. So there goes that argument. Poof.
Most innovation right now in the medical field is done at Public universities with (Oh no!) GOVERNMENT GRANTS! And what health insurance company does R&D anyhow? You're getting your entities mixed up.
"Abolish police? Now who is ridiculous?"
Right that is ridiculous. Just like private for-profit health insurance.
Before you poof something, you had better be very sure that you know it will work the way you want it to. Some doctors don't take it now, why would they have to take it after we all get Medicare?
My entities are quite clear. Who does the pharmaceutical research? Drug companies. Gov't grants for R&D? No. Not all medical research done at colleges w/gov't grants. And when medicine is no longer profitable (due to bad reimbursement) what hospital can afford new machines like MRI etc.?
Who's talking about drug companies? (Who really don't do much RnD look it up it's not profitable). You are getting mixed up I'M TALKING ABOUT HEALTH INSURANCE COMPANIES. Say it with me HEALTH INSURANCE COMPANIES. Not doctors offices not hospitals not clinics not drug companies OK? Get it now? Do I need to draw you a picture?
Drug Co.s don't do much R&D? Do you own a tv? Where do you think all the new drugs advertised come from?
As you were the one bringing up gov't grants for research at colleges, I sort of thought you wanted to talk about the WHOLE health care industry. Now that you've made yourself more clear, it will not be necessary to draw a picture or be as condescending.
Yes but I don't get the "drug companies doing R&D" Chanel. That must be like super extended cable or something.
I see a lot of drug companies spending money on commercials (the benefit of private competition). They spend Way more on marketing than anything else. Their RnD is they change the dosage of cealis and then spend a billion dollars marketing it as "New Cealimax."
Right. That's all drug companies do is reformulate the same drugs. They never make new ones. In fact, their whole R&D departments are nothing but a fake -- like a Hollywood set just for show. Come on. You're smarter than that.
And yes, they advertise and market them (which employs more people) so that the new drugs won't just sit on the shelf. It has been proven that telling customers about a new product helps to sell the new product. It's true. In fact, there's a whole industry based on that!
... and drug companies always do good things and they never hide negative drug trials or put bad versions into third world markets ...
Drugs are like beer now, ad driven products focused on consumers. That is fine as long as there are checks and balances, ie people are not just consumers, they are patients and citizens and people that have doctors and pay for regulators to test things that they can not on their own.
I worked in a hospital for 2 years and the marketing waste was incredible!!
Yes drug companies, like many companies unfortunately, have been known to do bad things. Prosecute the bad, and celebrate the good. Don't condemn whole industry at all times.
Drugs are like life-savers sometimes too. If you worked in a hospital, I'm sure you saw the many heart patients benefitting from anti-coagulants, for instance.
The amount of marketing money spent is, rightly, decided upon by the manufacturer. You may call it a waste, but do you have access to the ROI on that?
Yes, prosecute the bad and celebrate the good and more than that buy good products. I don't condemn every company in the industry, but I can and do criticize the industry! There is a distinction.
I did research in cholesterol research using radioactive probes on porphyrin molecules to assess atherosclerosis by non-invasive means. I saw many good drugs, but what you may not realize that at least 50% are based on gov't funded research initially.
Furthermore: Bad reimbursement? What bad reimbursement? Most doctors and people who do medical billing will tell you Medicare pays fastest with the least amount of hassle. If Medicare is the only insurance then all doctors will HAVE to take it. What else would they take? Taking the profit out of health insurance just means taking the billion dollar bonuses and dividends away from Execs and shareholders. You need to do some more investigating.
Reimbursement ratio has nothing to do with speed or hassle. Docs and hospitals get stuck with lower reimbursement for procedures from most insurance and Medicare is one of the bad ones. That is why some docs won't accept it. Now if you want to force 1)socialized medicine for all, & 2) all other insurance or self-pay to be forbidden then your scenario plays out. Do you really want to force people to take the insurance that you want? And you want to punish execs & shareholders? Very socialist.
The efficiency of Medicare, like nationalilzed health in foreign nations, has to do with numbers. How many people receive Medicare? Whatever the number, increase it now to 300 million! Do you think the process will remain as efficient? Is the fed gov efficient at anything really? they can't even manage the health of a few million veterans, what makes you think they can handle everyone in the nation?
Whatever the number, increase it now to 300 million! Do you think the process will remain as efficient?
YES. Absolutely. Medicare is a form of health insurance and like any insurance the theory behind it is that when you spread risk over a wider domain you decrease the benefit/risk ratio for individuals within that domain. The bigger the domain the MORE EFFICIENT. So yeah the best possible situation mathematically is if EVERYBODY is on it. Glad you asked.
What!? No! You're talking about whether or not the funds will be there and whether they can be applied to those who need it when taken from all the others that don't. Of course the funds would be there because if they aren't the gov would simply raise taxes until they are. (Like insurance price increases) But that's not the point. I'm talking about the processing, review, approval, disapproval, priority assignment (etc) aspects of it. That's where the wonderful efficiency would be killed.
Have you stipulated that Medicare does not pay the best? Have you stipulated that care will be rationed like in other countries with socialized medicine? As you did not disagree with those comments, I guess so. That's not the healthcare I want. How about you?
Equating police with private for-profit health insurance is a truly ignorant thing to do. Just for the sake of entertainment tho, go ahead and show me how both are so much like each other.
"Just for the sake of entertainment tho, go ahead and show me how both are so much like each other."
Entertained and educated.
They are both services we ALL need and they both cost more money than any one of us can afford (except multi-millionaires). Nobody I know can afford to pay out of pocket for a week hospital stay or an armed trained police officer with salary +benefits to come if their house if it's broken into. Financially they are very much alike.
1. Really? Some people can afford their own private security. Why should they pay for yours? Why do you expect a free lunch when it comes to law enforcement? (that's how silly your arguments sound about healthcare).
2. What residents don't have any government police protection? Localities without a PD depend on state and county police and FBI etc when needed.
3. Not everyone needs or wants police or major freeways either but we all still have to pay for it. It's a nonsense argument.
1&2. You're now stipulating that law enforcement is necessary to everyone. Good. More common ground. Everyone needs it, and everyone recognizes it. (You don't really have to explain the various entities to me. Just know that which one uses is dependent upon community choice in a vote and has consequential costs). Conversely, not all need or want healthcare. But you want all of us to pay for it anyway. Therefore: your comparison is "silly".
Keith Olbermann is worse than a cockroach. He might suck a cockroach's cock. He loves anything cock.
chewykiz 1 month ago
Freak
strokeofirish1 1 year ago
@BlakeBarbieDoll
Why don't you say something intelligent instead of mocking people you obviously know nothing about?
Elmagnifico37 1 year ago
Cause you don't watch anything of Olbermann you fuck
cliffside1000 1 year ago
@cliffside1000 I rest my case.
Elmagnifico37 1 year ago
Dumbass republicans... God, I hate those guys. No offense to those who support them, you're just misinformed, in my opinion. The actual GOP is who I hate.
ChaoticDemonOverlord 1 year ago
wow ! intellectual or what huh ? bonus !
JSLLH 2 years ago
Shows just how pathetic Keith Olbermann and MSNBC really is. Why people watch this show I really don't know.
UGLYSTIKCOLIN 2 years ago
@UGLYSTIKCOLIN well, them well educate, upwardly mobile, younger type folks could who watch Countdown could watch Fox, but they have too much respect for themselves to waste time with that crap.
integral 1 year ago
@integral Very few people actually watch overbites show with the intent to learn something.
UGLYSTIKCOLIN 1 year ago
nooo that's fox noise
cliffside1000 1 year ago
this guy is a hack - what a loser. Why is his suit so baggy?? is he hiding the fact thast hes a fat ass?? hmmmmmm? At least Bush was not a fat ass.
rzrbckgrl 2 years ago
@rzrbckgrl gee, what a well thought out, incisive statement. You're doing an excellent impression of a Fox viewer.
integral 1 year ago
bush was a fucking puppet, and olbermann was a sane person, and he never choked on a pretzel lol
cliffside1000 1 year ago
LOL at the logo in this video :P
FixedNewsChannel 2 years ago
That's racist plain the simple!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
ExodusPessoa 2 years ago 2
I'd like to see Michael Moore shit in this twinks mouth. Both would enjoy themselves.
flyboymd82 2 years ago
Keith O - gag me with a spoon. He is the most hateful person on television.
ssmarilyn 2 years ago
Wow, I can't believe Fox News said these things that Keith is reading from a transcript. But its true. And to think I though Fox was fair and balanced.
stangherret 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Keith Olbermann is an asshole. He sucks and he sucked when he was at ESPN otherwise he would still be their employed at ESPN. I guess only Keith knows why he's still not ther !
MENDEZMP9 2 years ago
And Your Point?
bittyrock 2 years ago
Do Research, keith has been getting paid a notable increase in salary since the very first day he left ESPN. "CountDown with keith Olbermann" Its kinda like a team wanting to keep a free agent but a different team is willing to pay him more if this were the case that player would have been keith olbermann. Engage your brain before you type please
cellblock151 2 years ago 2
Actually, he left espn because, he was offered his own show. A BETTER opportunity.
bigreed43 2 years ago
olbermann is a hell of a guy, We should all learn from him.
midnightcyberwriter 2 years ago
he sure is, he knows what hes talking about, unlike Fix News, o and uh, he doenst pop pills like Rush Limbaugh
longhornli629 2 years ago
you two are stupid and you two should feel stupid
BleedingExampleFL 2 years ago
Kieth *the asshole*Olberman is a wanted man!!
There is a warrant out for his arrest for tax evasion! LOL!
Just like Dash-hole, Geiter and the rest of the criminals in the democrat party.
Hope he gets tazed when arrested.
flyboymd82 3 years ago
Bill O the Clown has also been arrested for Tax Evasion.
Alchemist777 3 years ago
Can you cite where I can find info on that? I did advanced google searches and couldn't find anything about Oreilly being arrested for Tax evasion.
You wouldn't be lying now would ya?? I've know liberals to do that from time to time!
flyboymd82 3 years ago
I didn't think you could because your just another typical lying libtard! Its been five days since I asked.
Why must all liberals lie, smear, gossip, use propaganda, and make shit up?? Oh, because its ALL you got!
Democrats are such pathetic creatures. Pay your taxes donkey people!
flyboymd82 3 years ago
Jesus christ!.... "facepalm"
KaptajnKaffe 2 years ago
you sir are a fucking moron.
bnote1990 2 years ago
Snappy comment, take long to think it up?
flyboymd82 2 years ago
O Rielly got sued for Sexual Harrassment...
DameDiabolique 2 years ago
Seriously why have you got to be such an asshole?
Imnothecrazyone 2 years ago
Olbermann is like a retarded Marx. He and Franken should start their own show together on Comedy Central. It's like they believe in all the same things Marx did, but they just look really retarded. Hope I didn't hurt any of you drones' feelings! Idiots!
txbroncbuster 3 years ago
Oh, you sad sad little Texas neo con. How hard it must be for you to know that your guy fucked up so bad that America went to the other extreme in hopes of fixing that mess. While you burn some lean calories taxing that tiny brain of yours, thinking up some, no doubt classy come back filled with profanity, ponder this. Do you even realize just how truly irrelevant you and your peers are now?
DelaneyRoberts 3 years ago
WOW! Neo con, huh? What does that mean, exactly? Looks like we are relevant enough to put a damper on Hussein's plan to socialize America! Go get in line for your hand out, you drone! Don't forget to pay your taxes!
txbroncbuster 3 years ago
RUSH LIMMBAUGH, Sean "the idiot" Hannity, Ann Coulter, Mike Savage, and Pat Buchanan are ignorant, racist, inbred white trash!
publicatdamagnificen 3 years ago 2
youre stupid and you should feel stupid
BleedingExampleFL 2 years ago
Stupid?...Dude just because yer a Republican, you shouldn't call yourself names like that! Neoconservatives aren't "stupid".
Retarded- Yes....Ignorant- Of course....Racist- Definitely...Mean-Spirited- for sure!.....Lol Lol.
publicatdamagnificen 2 years ago 2
olbermann shitty sportcaster as well as a pundit.
kfactor1421 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
olbermann is an asshole.
qv76 3 years ago
He does speak the truth nonetheless.
jhompland 3 years ago
He is definitely an asshole! I wouldn't piss on his ashes to put them out!
mcoop221 3 years ago
Keith wishes he was on a program whom people actually watch. I think Keith has mentioned Bill O'Reilly's name about a million times. Heck he should just call him up and go suck one off since he is sooooo envious about him. I tried to watch this filth but I became so depressed that I killed myself. To bad it was a dud. Maybe Keith can show me...
MPodinator 3 years ago
Keith is on a program that is watched...it is more popular with the young,the well educated and the upper class...just like Senator Obama was during the campaign season. It has not taken Keith long to cut into Bill-o's ratings and viewership. Only trash watches FOX and the clowns over there who do nothing but spew nonsense and hatred.
BlakeBarbieDoll 3 years ago 10
Yeah right the young, well educated and the upper class watch more Fox News than Keiths ranting news media (if that's what you want to call it) by the way did you see all those young voters whom could not even guess what party is in the Congress and Senate right now. They all said Republicans, if that is well educated than your right. Did you also know that Keith had been fired by MSNBC a couple years ago before the election or not? Your last sentence says it all, hatred and calling people names
MPodinator 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
olbermann is a joke. he tries to spin off his personal opinion as facts and news.
DonnyCasino 3 years ago
no that would be bill oreilly... everything that he states is opinion and none of it has fact.
GstateBALLER925 3 years ago 9
This has been flagged as spam show
I know that some mccain supporters thrive off hate but last night showed them with clear vision that the majority of america is not having it. Obama commanded 43% of the white vote to mccains 55%. So lets stop this black and white shit once and for all ok. Alot of black people and other minirities cried last night because the good white people of this country had their say :) I am so so proud of my country and always have been :) wow obama09
GUTTERCOMEDY1 3 years ago
I'm a good "individual" and I still voted for McCain. Does that make me bad? No, what makes me bad is the fact that knocked somebody out because they wouldn't get out of my face because I wouldn't let them get infront of me in convience store line because they said "white boy you need to go somewhere" when nothing was said to them at all.
Slipknotdraken 3 years ago
HEY man, I'm sorry that some black dude invaded your space in that manner. There would be no excuse for that behavior no matter what but why are you blaming black people for this or obama? I'm not sure what you are getting at here "my friend" let us know ok.
GUTTERCOMEDY1 3 years ago
I don't blame Obama. I like the guy personally, I just don't agree with his policies. But it's his supporters that infuriate me. Yes they have the right to vote for him, but they do not have the right to patronize me because they "think" that since someone of the same colour is in a high power that they can label people for no true reason. If I am a racist then yes he has all right to call me out on it, but that's only if he has his facts.
Slipknotdraken 3 years ago
Slipknotdraken,I understand you completely but voted against mccains policies. The word "racism" gets used by blacks alot times for no reason. I can tell you that certain instincts come with being oppressed or growing up around oppressed people. I think we all just need to respect each others opinions because when it's all said and done. obama and mccain are still on the same team.
GUTTERCOMEDY1 3 years ago
I completely agree. I respect a person's opinion and their beliefs. I just inturn would appreciate the same courtesy.
Slipknotdraken 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Keith O. has his biased head so far up Obama's ass that his face forms the head of Obama's penis!
tonytube77 3 years ago
HUMMMMM, take a look at FOX NEWS with republican views bud.... I'd say its the SAME DAMN THING... you're ignorant and that's a fact..
jadebrew 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
The BIG difference is Fox gets opposing viewpoints from liberal guests. Keith is a one man show. He gets puppets on his show that agree with all he says. His faggot ass is too scared to have anyone who disagrees with him. It's obviously NOT the SAME DAMN THING... It's obvious you're the ignorant one here!!
tonytube77 3 years ago
Keith ROCKS!
epicownageplz 3 years ago 4
I have to agree with the title, Keith O some of your stuff is of the Worlds Worst.
Keith O, get some guts. You obviously have earned enough money to support yourself for the rest of your life. Get off of MSNBC, and start actually voicing your own opinions with your angry voice, instead of being a puppet for the democratic party which is owned by hmmmm? I'm sure you know.
browneyzblue 3 years ago
How come all black people used to hate Colin Powell and called him an Uncle Tom, etc., but now they love him....go figure.
iam70schick 3 years ago
I don't remember Colin Powell being hated by blacks. In fact, most of the blacks I know like him, especially since he left Bush (psst...I'm black). But stop putting us in a group! Everyone has their own opinion.
slharris1984 3 years ago 2
Yay for this comment SLHARRIS !!!
YES PEOPLE!!! STOP putting all blacks and all whites into just 2 groups and saying we all have to think alike, just because of the amount of melanin in our skin. How stupid is that?!
browneyzblue 3 years ago
'all' black people? wow, i'm impressed.
ghbaby08 3 years ago
to iam70: They were not proud of Powell for what he refused to do early on. That was to denounce Bush and his cronies as liers and theives. They (blacks) are proud of the man not his social misadventuress. Have a greatday!
gjohnson87109 3 years ago
I'm thinking the worst and most virulent racists would be all the lefties who mocked Colin Powell when he was a member of the Bush cabinet. You know, people like Jimmy Kimmel and Bill Maher, who said stuff like "I'm blacker than Colin Powell". Nice.
Don't you love it when (liberal) white people get to decide which black people are "black enough"? It's enough to make one hearken back to the 1930's and those loony government classifications for blacks like "quadroons, octaroons and mullatos".
FillibusterJones 3 years ago
vote obama for communism. lets share the wealth... cool!!!!
wpokets 3 years ago
Nice lie. If you had any clue you'd know Obama is as close to communism as McCain is to Nazism.
Kelekolio 3 years ago
Be sure to vote Nov. 4th Tuesday!
ShukyoWaBaka 3 years ago
I love keith; he brings solid facts unlike liars like foxnews and his gang and others you see in media.
handsometall28 3 years ago
LOL. I love Keith Olbermann. I can't believe I'm just discovering him.
almi0316 3 years ago 3
Big mistake by the desperate Democrats to gain votes. The only thing that getting an endorsement by a retired Party turncoat will do is send a clear message to White Dems to switch parties because of race, as Colin Powell did. Bad strategic move in such a close race. This will also damage Colin Powell's reputation. The only thing that he will be able to endorse now is Viagra or Depends. BTW, the race is VERY close...the liberal main stream media manufactured poles are not. Big surprise on Nov.4.
thatcherpelcoid 3 years ago
So turncoats like Liebermann are okay, but not respected ex-Military officers from the Bush administration.
Wow, Repubs are twisting in the wind and Powell is joined by lots of other intelligent reflective Conservatives.
I'll take my business advice from Warren Buffet and military leadership advice from Colin Powell ... and both support Obama. Sorry neo-cons!!!!
Kelekolio 3 years ago
charity doesnt provide enough aid to effectively help all those in need you know why??? BECAUSE ITS CHARITY people give only if they want to or not you have to give to the government and those people with almost nothing have to give as well what little they may have so its the governments job to make sure they have something to give.
Raphael2885 3 years ago
Well done Colin...
One of the few who really has put country first.
Blind loyalty defies common sense.
unclesam21 3 years ago
I would like to see republican and democrats gone and a RE INTRODUCTION OF THE "WHIG" OR WHIGS PARTY.
jeremy34769 3 years ago
If you really want information on the situation effecting us all see Ron Paul and Mumia Abu Jamal's take on the economy on my page! Wake up America this is not a race issue! Pass along
0alstonw0 3 years ago
The Republican party spent $150,000 in donated money in 1 month for Sarah Palin's (& her families) Neiman Marcus wardrobe, & now struggles to pay for their campaign costs! (I guess she's an example of what a "real" Americanis). Hockey mom & Joe the plumber my ass. This gives a glimpse how a GOP administration would fritter away taxpayer money. So how is it drinking that champagne that McCain thinks a "real" American drinks? the GOP has gone the way of Jerry Springer & The Beverly Hillbillies!!
aquatania 3 years ago 3
Fixed News. Haha.
melora72 3 years ago
It's really eye-opening that the gloves are off. The Clinton's with the black community and The Republican reaction to Powell.
All Black people should know that Crackers are crackers.
TribeTPaul 3 years ago
AntiConformist911, I won't say Powel is only endorsing Obama because of race, but it is a possibility, especially when considering the huge difference in the political ideals of each. Also, there are those who will say without flinching that many whites won't vote for obama based on race, but it is somehow rediculous to assume that many blacks are voting FOR him for the same reason!? That logic itself is racist. Race with disregard for policy plays a part both ways, lets not lie to ourselves.
eluminated 3 years ago
"I won't say Powel is only endorsing Obama because of race, but it is a possibility, especially when considering the huge difference in the political ideals of each."
How many other black candidates has Powell endorsed? And can you list those "differences in political ideals" please cause I can't find ANY.
sinistar99 3 years ago
The relevent question is - how many DEMOCRAT candidates has Powel endorsed? Because the only similarities between the two men are racial similarities. Now, again, I'm not accusing Powel of anything, I really do respect him, I'm saying its ironic that Obama happens to be the one democrat Powel aligns himself with. And, sini if you "can't find any" politically ideological differences between their two careers than you must be searching with your eyes closed.
eluminated 3 years ago
"Because the only similarities between the two men are racial similarities."
That's not true. Have you listened to Powell's endorsement? They agree on almost everything. Powell list a lot of compelling real reasons --none of which have to do with race. There's more to a candidate than just party affiliation. Those who want to dismiss Powell's endorsement as racial biased are trying to hide the fact that the Republican ticket is so awful Powell really had no choice.
sinistar99 3 years ago
I don't deny that McCain is a deuche and the Republicans are worthless, but I'm talking about more than the endorsement speech. I'm talking about Powel's history and what he has endorced and advanced throughout his career. He has always held conservative ideals (the GOOD kind) where people make themselves what they want to be, not what the government can make of them. Powel trully is a self made success story. That is America. Obama declares that we need the gov to do it for us. That's socialism
eluminated 3 years ago
"or whose mission is to provide the service you expect them to." Again, name one thing that the gov does efficiently where we trully get our money's worth. A private business is MUCH more interested in givin you the service you expect than is the government. if a company doesn't give the customers what they want, they lose their customers. The gov isn't under such pressure because they know we have no other gov to turn to unless we leave! Where do you get better service? A restaurant or the DMV?
eluminated 3 years ago
...also think about how silly private competing DMVs would be. They'd have to pay for advertising, shareholder's profits etc... your driver's license would cost $200 dollars but hey service would be with a smile! And what would be the benefit? You could take your business to the DMV across town with the $169 license sale?
sinistar99 3 years ago
I guess Olbermann has to admit Fux was right huh? And what the fuck was "racist" about what they said!? You can't point out that the guy was dancing to hip hop at an African party!? So now making reference to someone celebrating their African heritage is racist! Is it racist to point out a Kennedy marching in the St Pat's Day Parade? Fuckin Olbermann has become a total hypocrit cocksuker! Fuck him! Hopefully he gets cancer in his eyes real soon!
eluminated 3 years ago
InvestigatorDave Your opinion is your opinion..but judging by the backlach your receiving for making that stupid comment I can safely say your wrong on this one..Most of us agree something has to be done about our present health care practices whether you believe so or not!
wooddrow79 3 years ago
Wooddrow:
I did not make a stupid comment, and someone who doesn't know "your" from "you're" shouldn't be throwing around the word "stupid".
The backlash is you, Sinistar, and 1911arthur. Are we going to use this as the basis for a decision to implement socialized medicine? Three people?! Does it necessarily mean that the lone dissenting voice is "wrong"?
The "most of us" to whom you refer (again, 3 people) may believe something needs to be done, but fortunately you 3 can't force this.
InvestigatorDave 3 years ago
Great! Now (you are) my grammer teacher? The Backlash is in the polls,The new registered voters coming out in record numbers the economy YOU see 3 people, I see people (expecially young people) showing an interest in a presidential election(in particular this presidential race) WHY? I think you already know..
Bellwa925 3 years ago
Bellwa:
To my knowledge, I have not exchanged posts with you, so I'm not your "grammer teacher". If you'd like me to be, I will (let's start with "grammar" with an "a").
The polls you mention NOW are not the backlash Wood mentioned earlier about this thread. The polls you mention also show the 2 candidates in a race that is basically a tie when factoring the statistical margin of error. There are no polls showing Obama's health care policy being the reason for that.
InvestigatorDave 3 years ago
"the "most of us" to whom you refer (again, 3 people) 3 people?"
You need to get your facts from more than just this forum. LOL I could get 4 of my friends to comment here and really screw with your statistics! You know who DOES poll representative samples? The AP. And according to their poll last year 65% of Americans said they would prefer a single-payer non-profit health insurance system to the one we have now.
sinistar99 3 years ago
Sinistar:
As noted in the comment clearly directed to Wooddrow in direct response to his comment about the backlash on this series of posts. Perhaps before inserting yourself into an exchange you could read the whole exchange.
Those who favor the system you want do not understand the ramifications of it.
InvestigatorDave 3 years ago
I see. We can certainly agree that you can't judge anything about public opinion based on these comments. I misunderstood your post. My bad.
My point stands though that most Americans want a single-payer non-profit system for health insurance.
sinistar99 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
As a conservative, Rush is wrong! I want America to know that the NeoCons are not representatives of the republican party. People like Powell and Hagel are where most of us are. McCain use to be part of the conservative group but I don't know what he is doing running with the hateful NeoCons, except desperate people will say or do desperate things. That is why I voted for Obama in our early voting. It is time for change and if Obama gets too liberal we can always vote him out later in 2012.
runningchance 3 years ago
We just don't want to be taxed on our health care premiums and we want the freedom to be able to buy into Medicare a more efficient non-profit system. McCain's plan, tax middle class more and still leave most people out --no thanks.
Republicans idea of health care reform is not to unplug Terri Schaivo. What a joke.
sinistar99 3 years ago
Hey, investigator dave, your really a dummy! It's not socilaized health care! Didn't you watch the debates? Obama's health proposal is that you keep your current plan at cheaper rates. If you don't have a plan, you can get the congessional plan. The same one congress has which is mainly, Blue Cross.
You've been brainwashed buddy. McSame lies, and you idiots believe his BS.
1911arthur 3 years ago
Before calling anyone a "dummy", you should make sure you know how to capitalize and use contractions.
If my healthcare is suddenly cheaper, under Obama, who is picking up the rest of the tab? If there are those without insurance, who suddenly get Obama's insurance, who is picking up their tab? And what of those who have no money to pay for health insurance -- who picks up their tab?
If your answer to any question is "Gov't", then is is socialized.
InvestigatorDave 3 years ago
who is picking up the rest of the tab?
That's just it... there is no "rest of the tab" The rest of the tab is what's not being paid to shareholders in the form of profit dividends marketing lobbyists, etc. Some things work better when socialized. Should we have competing private military(s)?
sinistar99 3 years ago
The way 1911 explained it, is not how you are explaining it. He says that we get what we have now, just cheaper. Well, how did it suddenly get cheaper? Who is subsidizing?
The military argument is a red herring. The Constitution provides for a military to protect the country. The Prez is listed as CIC. There can't be competing military(s). And the military is not socialized.
Nothing works better when the gov't runs it. See former USSR for examples, or current DMV.
InvestigatorDave 3 years ago
The military IS socialized! Is it a private company? I see you have 1 example of a country... do you have any examples of a private DMV that works better? The DMV works just fine. Did you not get a drivers license or what? Health insurance works better when socialized see EVERY OTHER INDUSTRIALIZED COUNTRY for examples. By what we have now he means the same doctors and providers...The change is just with insurance --who writes the checks.
sinistar99 3 years ago
You are a dummy..So what you think (you'er) a good speller, you lack basic common sense or (you'er) an fool. QUESTION? who picks up the tab for Fanie Mae Freddie Mac? Bail out people with money..Let struggling americans fend for themselves..Do me and others a favor KILL YOUR MUTHER F*CKIN SELVES PLEASE!!!!!
wooddrow79 3 years ago
Wood:
In summary: Yes, I spell well, and my grammar is pretty good too. Your posts are hard to read due to lack of proper spelling and grammar. You should think about that.
The US taxpayers will pick up bailout of Fannie and Freddie. But you know that. What I doubt you know is how the mess was created, who was responsible, and the consequences of not bailing them out.
"Kill myself"? Really? Is that how far this exchange has degenerated? Wow. I thought you had more on the ball than that.
InvestigatorDave 3 years ago
Yes, healthcare is a right! McSame's healthcare might as well be THE EMERGENCY ROOM, as it covers, nothing! No pre-existing, nothing! It's a freakin joke!
Obama's is way better and way cheaper and covers,EVERYTHING! It's the same plan he has. The same that every congressman has!
Palin, is the ultimate slap in the face! She's a freakin dummy!!!!!
1911arthur 3 years ago
Please work with wooddrow to find anywhere in the Bill of Rights where it is stated that Healthcare is a right. When you find that, I'll start believing it is a right. When you can't find it, you start believing that it is not a right.
InvestigatorDave 3 years ago
There are lots of rights not stated in the first 10 amendments or not specifically enumerated anywhere in the Constitution. That doesn't mean they are not or shouldn't be rights. Before the civil rights act, Black people didn't have the same rights as white people in the constitution so would you have then argued that they shouldn't have those rights? We needed an amendment then, just like we do now.
sinistar99 3 years ago
So, when that ammendment is passed, and becomes a "right" it will by definition be a "right" (although never mentioned in the Constitution). Until such time as that happens, guess what? Not a right.
InvestigatorDave 3 years ago
I really dont want to dig and hit you with facts..point is that I cant afford to work hard most my life to aquire a decent stanard of living.house car managible bills to have it take away because I got sick and the debt to pay for treatment forces me back to the drawing board, Thats Bullshit Obama didnt say he would socialize medicine but the Business practices are kill the same people that keep America going. Medicine and treatment have been Inflated to the point its un affordable
wooddrow79 3 years ago
Wooddrow: There are other options to avoid having the disastrous outcome you describe without having to resort to socialized medicine.
Also, when the medical industry realizes that the gov't is footing the bill, they will try to raise costs. When the gov't says it will only pay $X not $Y, the medical industry will decide to provide less. Or, the gov't will agree to $Y and then ration the availability to the citizens when they start running out of money -- like in Canada.
InvestigatorDave 3 years ago
Speculation..So I long term end is less exceptable than a short term end? What do you suggest then? continue forward and let us implode? if you cant fix us we cant work we cant maintain our expencies we are no longer productive in society, then we become your problem.Likley encountered late at night..while your walking from your car to your home with your family..So what do you suggest?
Bellwa925 3 years ago
Speculation..So I long term end is less exceptable than a short term end? What do you suggest then? continue forward and let us implode? if you cant fix us we cant work we cant maintain our expencies we are no longer productive in society, then we become your problem.Likley encountered late at night..while your walking from your car to your home with your family..So what do you suggest? HAHA!
wooddrow79 3 years ago
Bell:
I don't know what "So I long term end is less exceptable than a short term end?" is supposed to mean. It doesn't make sense to me.
I do understand that you feel that if you get very sick, and if the gov't doesn't pay your medical expenses, you will become a criminal preying on people walking to their cars. If so, you can't be too sick, and you should be prepared to face the consequences of such an action.
What do I suggest? Take care of & protect yourself. Don't look to gov't to do it.
InvestigatorDave 3 years ago
So you don't believe Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of happiness are inalienable rights because they aren't in the constitution?
Also in the constitution it is specifically stated that congress can pass laws which can grant rights all day long.
The "It's not in the constitution" argument is a childish sophomoric attempt to "amateur lawyer" your way around common sense. We're talking about moral human rights not what your narrow interpretation of a piece of paper says.
sinistar99 3 years ago
Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are inalienable rights, and are delineated in the declaration of independence -- the first document written to found our gov't. Sort of a preamble to the preamble.
Yes, congress can pass laws. Who said otherwise?
The constitution is the basis for the governance of our country. Interpretting it is what the Supreme Court does. Are they childish?
How do you define a "moral human right", and why doesn't it have to be constitutional to be US law?
InvestigatorDave 3 years ago
Looks like I gave you enuff rope..The American people are the Government..You should try not to forget that..
wooddrow79 3 years ago
The American people are the ones who elect those who represent us in gov't. You should try to learn that.
InvestigatorDave 3 years ago
THUS..Making us the ones that decide our fate..We like you your in, we dont like you your out (BUSH/MCCAIN) what part of my sentence didn't (did you not) understand?
wooddrow79 3 years ago
Wood:
I managed to muddle thru what you just wrote, and believe I understand it (despite your writing "style").
To a degree, you are right. We do have a role in deciding our fate as far as hoping we elect the right people to do in office what we wish. You're forgetting that you have much more influence over your fate in the actions you take everyday. Do you have the right insurance, enough of it, and if not, what have you done about that?
InvestigatorDave 3 years ago
"Until such time as that happens, guess what? Not a right."
Then please explain the 9th amendment. It's to protect rights not enumerated in the constitution. Now if what you say is true, and there are no rights not enumerated in the constitution, what is the 9th amendment protecting? It would make no sense. So enough with the "it's not in the constitution" BS it's a stupid reason to not believe it's a right. Please find a less nonsensical reason --and I'll tear that down too.
sinistar99 3 years ago
9th: "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be contrued to deny or disparge others retained by the people." Do you believe health insurance was one of the ones they meant? Any person can obtain healthcare and health insurance. The gov't has not prevented that.
When you have torn down one of my arguments, I'll let you know. You seem to grade yourself very favorably.
InvestigatorDave 3 years ago
If you mean (any) are you talking about Good Health Insurence? or patch work? because most of us receive patch work! Not the kind of benifits people that make over 250,000 or more a year! I am curious to know what kind of health care provider you have InvestigatorDave and how much does this insurence cost? can I get it? tell me..maybe Im just ill informed..so help me out..PLEASE you do seem content! I'd like to feel that way! you are healthy atleast..I guess?
wooddrow79 3 years ago
"Any person can obtain healthcare and health insurance."
No any person can't. Only people who can afford it can. Where does it say "Life, Liberty...etc for those who can afford it?" The government provides legal council if you are accused of a crime and can't afford an attorney because we have a RIGHT to a fair trial. Not only people with money are supposed to have this right. Same with Life.
sinistar99 3 years ago
Yes any person can, but as with all good and services, you do have to pay for it. Do you give your work away? Actually, those who can't afford it get exactly the same care at hospitals you do. It's called charity care. If you can live with the shame, just tell the hospital you have no insurance or way to pay, and they write it off. The hospital eats it.
L,L..etc. means the gov't can't deny you those things (except in case of imprisonment). Doesn't say they'll buy it for you.
InvestigatorDave 3 years ago
Uhh...sini... protecting a right DOES NOT mean having the government give you something, it means they cannot DENY you from having it! The 2nd tells the government they cannot deny our right to keep and bear arms, it doesn't say they have to buy guns for us! Ben Franklin put it best: "The Constitution gives you the right to PURSUE happiness, it is up to you to CATCH it!" Since when did government handouts become the American dream?
eluminated 3 years ago
The government spends trillions of dollars providing me a free defense. I enjoy a free highway system, free fire and police protection... We get free things from the govt all day long. It doesn't say PERSUE life. Life is a right. You don't have to earn it or catch it or inherit it. And since you need air to live don't you have a right to air? How about water? It's not a far stretch to say if you need medication to live you have a right to that too.
sinistar99 3 years ago
The government provides firemen, police etc but they don't HAVE TO! Many places have only volunteer fire depts. Highways aren't "free" you pay for them with gas taxes, and that's a tax you don't have to pay if you don't own a car. Water too does not HAVE TO be provided. It is in big cities because the cities wouldn't exist otherwise but countless homes and businesses have well-water that has nothing to do with government. The only thing the government really HAS TO PROVIDE is access to voting.
eluminated 3 years ago
Also NOTHING IS FREE! Every single thing that is provided by the government is paid for by TAXES! Some things, like building bridges and armies, the gov is good at. But how many things that they currently provide are complete clusterfucks? They have no business "providing" (see:CONTROLLING) many of the things they already do! Education comes to mind. If you want a completely worthless medical system that's your business but don't try to say the constitution mandates it. You're in over your head!
eluminated 3 years ago
The Government HAS TO PROVIDE anything we say it does. It's there FOR US. It's a machine we created to and I quote "Provide for the welfare and common defence..." Government shouldn't run education? Who should? Enron? Halliburton? Does Holland have nothing but Private schools? How come their students score better at math and science and they have to speak 4 languages to graduate High School? Again you need to do some more investigating.
sinistar99 3 years ago
You have to understand that when you say the government should "provide" something you're also granting them the authority to CONTROL it. That's where the problems come in. And you can't seem to differentiate between local and federal gov'ts. Local govs should control schools, not the fed. And using other countries as examples doesn't work either. What is the population in Holland? NYC alone probably has more people. That's why such things work for them. The US is a whole different situation.
eluminated 3 years ago
"... you're also granting them the authority to CONTROL it."
Look right now if you have health insurance, somebody who is not you is CONTROLING your health care dollars. Unless you're rich enough to pay out-of pocket for everything, Somebody is ALWAYS going to CONTROL your health care dollars. Do you want it to be somebody whose whole motive is to take as much for themselves as possible or whose mission is to provide the service you expect them to.
sinistar99 3 years ago
"somebody who is not you is CONTROLING your health care dollars." Granted, when you pay someone to provide a service it is up to them to do it properly. But the "control" is ultimately yours because you have a choice to continue employing them as your provider. If you don't like your med insurance provider, your barber, your babysitter, your mechanic, whatever you can bring your business to someone else.
eluminated 3 years ago
"you can bring your business to someone else." Ok I choose to bring my health care business to a non profit nationalized health care provider. Who do I call for that?
Like I said, it's not like ordering a pizza. Health insurance companies can deny you for any reason. Good luck taking advantage of that competition if you have any existing condition. A full nationalized health care system could not deny anyone. That's the whole point.
sinistar99 3 years ago
"protecting a right DOES NOT mean having the government give you something, it means they cannot DENY you from having it!"
Uhh... eluminated, it depends on the right. In the 2nd Amendment it says "...shall not be abridged." which means as you say it can't be Denied.
The right to legal council, however isn't worded that way so the government DOES HAVE TO PROVIDE you with an attorney if you can't afford one. Some rights are positive rights and require an active role of the government.
sinistar99 3 years ago
when people are losing there life savings and houses to medical debt..it becomes a very important issues..fuck a credit of 5000..i pay taxes and i want my medical coverage to be a right even manditory as a tax paying american
wooddrow79 3 years ago
You didn't mention race in the first post, so didn't think you thought it important. It isn't important. The Bush admin did not send Powell to the UN to push for a multi-national attack on Iraq because Powell was black. Race wasn't an issue in that action at all. His credibility came from many factors, but none related to Powell's race.
InvestigatorDave 3 years ago
Republiscums have reached a new low, if that is possible.
They will lose as they have a health plan that is a freakin joke!
We don't want your health plan. We want health care for all! It is a right!
1911arthur 3 years ago
If socialized healthcare is your #1 priority, I don't understand your prioritization process. The US economy and national security are far more important than socialized healthcare, or any healthcare.
Obama might get it passed if elected, altho the last time someone tried this (Hillarycare), it failed to be enacted. Kerry ran with strong healthcare mssg, and he lost. Not sure it is that important, relatively, to voters.
BTW, healthcare for all is not a right.
InvestigatorDave 3 years ago
investigatordave..and you a one of the few that dont get it..treating illness should not be a treated as a business..it should be a right to the people that keep this country moving forward US hard working americans.
wooddrow79 3 years ago
I am having trouble understanding what you wrote, but will try to respond the best I can based upon what I believe you are trying to say.
Healthcare is a business. It is a very large part of the US economy. The Federal Gov't should never be in charge of that large of a piece of the economy. That is socialism, and antithetical to the Constitution and our values as Americans.
2nd: I would like you to provide me with any support you can find in US Bill of Rights that says healthcare is a right.
InvestigatorDave 3 years ago
The Federal Gov't should never be in charge of that large of a piece of the economy.
**************************
Were you born that stupid or did you have to work at it.
The Federal Government is already in charge of a large portion of American healthcare.
"WHAT DO YOU CALL MEDICARE" we all know somebody that has the Federal Government healthcare plan.
It seems to work just fine to me, especially since work in the health information field.
hiiamrick 3 years ago
After writing "It seems to work just fine to me, especially since work in the health information field.", you probably should not be calling anyone "stupid".
Are you seriously comparing Medicare to HillaryCare, or socialized medicine like the Dems want?
InvestigatorDave 3 years ago
Are you seriously comparing Medicare to HillaryCare, or socialized medicine like the Dems want?
************************
Do you really think that health care is not a right that American are supposed have?
Are the Police and Fire Depatments a right that Americans have?
I see jut how stupid Health Insuranc Companies are after all is used to work for one.
Now I work in a physicians office and bill the healthcare companies.
hiiamrick 3 years ago
I do not think that healthcare is a right. If you can find it in the Bill of Rights, then I'll change my mind.
Police and Fire Depts. are not a right either. Find that in the Bill of Rights, and I'll change my mind.
After writing: "I see jut how stupid Health Insuranc Companies are after all is used to work for one.", you probably should not be calling any entity "stupid". I hope, for the sake of the practice, you boss doesn't let you communicate with outside people & companies.
InvestigatorDave 3 years ago
I communicate with outside people and companies just fine, because I have one thing that you failed to learn in life.
I respect other peoples points of view, I can agree to disagree.
Whats with you and calling things stupid. Stupid is what stupid does.
If they elect McCain then we will really see just how stupid Americans are?
If a group of idiots drove your country off a financial cliff, would you really trust them to continue driving.
Time to find a new driver.
Obama 08
hiiamrick 3 years ago
Hiiamrick:
Given your writing "style" (as quoted in previous post), I would argue that your communication skills are not as good as you think they are. Nonetheless, I did not call you or anything "stupid". You, however, did. We can agree to disagree. At least we should disagree on facts.
As for finding a new driver, regardless of election outcome, we will have one. Bush is not running this year (surely you noticed). Obama would be the wrong replacement driver. We can't afford him.
InvestigatorDave 3 years ago
...According to a study paid for by the Bush Administration, 20,000 Americans die each year because of lack of regular health insurance. That's more than all the Americans killed by terrorists ever --yet we're ok with spending trillions and forming new government (socialist) agencies to "fight terror." That's a problem with priorities.
Most Americans favor a single-payer non-profit health care system.
sinistar99 3 years ago
Enough with the Gov't agencies that are Fed agencies being described as socialized.
Most Americans will NOT want socialized medicine when they find out that it is basically one-size-fits-all, and reduces choice, and will HAVE TO ration care. Besides, some Americans do not have insurance because they do not want it -- now you're going to make them pay for something (thru taxes) that they don't want. Single payer means no competition; degraded services and standard prices. Where's the freedom?
InvestigatorDave 3 years ago
"...when they find out that it is basically one-size-fits-all, and reduces choice, and will HAVE TO ration care...(bla bla bla)."
Except none of that is true. With medicare (a government run socialized program, you can see any doctor you want and not get turned down for and existing condition. It's more efficient pays better and is less expensive. What degradation in service? Some Americans don't want police either should we do away with that? Your arguments are ridiculous.
sinistar99 3 years ago
With Medicare you most certainly cannot see any doctor you wish. Some doctors do not accept Medicare and will refuse service to those who wish to use that for payment.
It does pay, but not better than all the other insurance out there.
Degradation in service because of the rationed care that will come with it, also the retardation of innovation in the medical field bcse companies will not be able to afford R&D.
Abolish police? Now who is ridiculous?
InvestigatorDave 3 years ago
When medicare is available for All of us then All doctors will accept it. So there goes that argument. Poof.
Most innovation right now in the medical field is done at Public universities with (Oh no!) GOVERNMENT GRANTS! And what health insurance company does R&D anyhow? You're getting your entities mixed up.
"Abolish police? Now who is ridiculous?"
Right that is ridiculous. Just like private for-profit health insurance.
sinistar99 3 years ago
Before you poof something, you had better be very sure that you know it will work the way you want it to. Some doctors don't take it now, why would they have to take it after we all get Medicare?
My entities are quite clear. Who does the pharmaceutical research? Drug companies. Gov't grants for R&D? No. Not all medical research done at colleges w/gov't grants. And when medicine is no longer profitable (due to bad reimbursement) what hospital can afford new machines like MRI etc.?
InvestigatorDave 3 years ago
Who's talking about drug companies? (Who really don't do much RnD look it up it's not profitable). You are getting mixed up I'M TALKING ABOUT HEALTH INSURANCE COMPANIES. Say it with me HEALTH INSURANCE COMPANIES. Not doctors offices not hospitals not clinics not drug companies OK? Get it now? Do I need to draw you a picture?
sinistar99 3 years ago
Drug Co.s don't do much R&D? Do you own a tv? Where do you think all the new drugs advertised come from?
As you were the one bringing up gov't grants for research at colleges, I sort of thought you wanted to talk about the WHOLE health care industry. Now that you've made yourself more clear, it will not be necessary to draw a picture or be as condescending.
InvestigatorDave 3 years ago
"Drug Co.s don't do much R&D? Do you own a tv?"
Yes but I don't get the "drug companies doing R&D" Chanel. That must be like super extended cable or something.
I see a lot of drug companies spending money on commercials (the benefit of private competition). They spend Way more on marketing than anything else. Their RnD is they change the dosage of cealis and then spend a billion dollars marketing it as "New Cealimax."
sinistar99 3 years ago
Right. That's all drug companies do is reformulate the same drugs. They never make new ones. In fact, their whole R&D departments are nothing but a fake -- like a Hollywood set just for show. Come on. You're smarter than that.
And yes, they advertise and market them (which employs more people) so that the new drugs won't just sit on the shelf. It has been proven that telling customers about a new product helps to sell the new product. It's true. In fact, there's a whole industry based on that!
InvestigatorDave 3 years ago
... and drug companies always do good things and they never hide negative drug trials or put bad versions into third world markets ...
Drugs are like beer now, ad driven products focused on consumers. That is fine as long as there are checks and balances, ie people are not just consumers, they are patients and citizens and people that have doctors and pay for regulators to test things that they can not on their own.
I worked in a hospital for 2 years and the marketing waste was incredible!!
Kelekolio 3 years ago
Kel:
Yes drug companies, like many companies unfortunately, have been known to do bad things. Prosecute the bad, and celebrate the good. Don't condemn whole industry at all times.
Drugs are like life-savers sometimes too. If you worked in a hospital, I'm sure you saw the many heart patients benefitting from anti-coagulants, for instance.
The amount of marketing money spent is, rightly, decided upon by the manufacturer. You may call it a waste, but do you have access to the ROI on that?
InvestigatorDave 3 years ago
Yes, prosecute the bad and celebrate the good and more than that buy good products. I don't condemn every company in the industry, but I can and do criticize the industry! There is a distinction.
I did research in cholesterol research using radioactive probes on porphyrin molecules to assess atherosclerosis by non-invasive means. I saw many good drugs, but what you may not realize that at least 50% are based on gov't funded research initially.
I didn't call ads a waste, just no sub for ed.
Kelekolio 3 years ago
Investigator...
Furthermore: Bad reimbursement? What bad reimbursement? Most doctors and people who do medical billing will tell you Medicare pays fastest with the least amount of hassle. If Medicare is the only insurance then all doctors will HAVE to take it. What else would they take? Taking the profit out of health insurance just means taking the billion dollar bonuses and dividends away from Execs and shareholders. You need to do some more investigating.
sinistar99 3 years ago
Reimbursement ratio has nothing to do with speed or hassle. Docs and hospitals get stuck with lower reimbursement for procedures from most insurance and Medicare is one of the bad ones. That is why some docs won't accept it. Now if you want to force 1)socialized medicine for all, & 2) all other insurance or self-pay to be forbidden then your scenario plays out. Do you really want to force people to take the insurance that you want? And you want to punish execs & shareholders? Very socialist.
InvestigatorDave 3 years ago
The efficiency of Medicare, like nationalilzed health in foreign nations, has to do with numbers. How many people receive Medicare? Whatever the number, increase it now to 300 million! Do you think the process will remain as efficient? Is the fed gov efficient at anything really? they can't even manage the health of a few million veterans, what makes you think they can handle everyone in the nation?
eluminated 3 years ago 2
Whatever the number, increase it now to 300 million! Do you think the process will remain as efficient?
YES. Absolutely. Medicare is a form of health insurance and like any insurance the theory behind it is that when you spread risk over a wider domain you decrease the benefit/risk ratio for individuals within that domain. The bigger the domain the MORE EFFICIENT. So yeah the best possible situation mathematically is if EVERYBODY is on it. Glad you asked.
sinistar99 3 years ago
What!? No! You're talking about whether or not the funds will be there and whether they can be applied to those who need it when taken from all the others that don't. Of course the funds would be there because if they aren't the gov would simply raise taxes until they are. (Like insurance price increases) But that's not the point. I'm talking about the processing, review, approval, disapproval, priority assignment (etc) aspects of it. That's where the wonderful efficiency would be killed.
eluminated 3 years ago
Sinistar:
Furthermore:
Have you stipulated that Medicare does not pay the best? Have you stipulated that care will be rationed like in other countries with socialized medicine? As you did not disagree with those comments, I guess so. That's not the healthcare I want. How about you?
Equating police with private for-profit health insurance is a truly ignorant thing to do. Just for the sake of entertainment tho, go ahead and show me how both are so much like each other.
InvestigatorDave 3 years ago
"Just for the sake of entertainment tho, go ahead and show me how both are so much like each other."
Entertained and educated.
They are both services we ALL need and they both cost more money than any one of us can afford (except multi-millionaires). Nobody I know can afford to pay out of pocket for a week hospital stay or an armed trained police officer with salary +benefits to come if their house if it's broken into. Financially they are very much alike.
sinistar99 3 years ago
So, still stipulating. That's good. We've found some common ground.
Why you're entertaining by not educated:
1. Law Enforcement is necessary to everyone.
2. Decision to have a PD is based upon local residents who decide and vote on it.
3. Not everyone needs or wants health insurance (which is why many refuse it when offered thru employers)
4. W/O insurance, I can pay for ER visit. How's that equate to police?
5. If med bills too high, can declare bankruptcy. How equate to police?
InvestigatorDave 3 years ago
1. Really? Some people can afford their own private security. Why should they pay for yours? Why do you expect a free lunch when it comes to law enforcement? (that's how silly your arguments sound about healthcare).
2. What residents don't have any government police protection? Localities without a PD depend on state and county police and FBI etc when needed.
3. Not everyone needs or wants police or major freeways either but we all still have to pay for it. It's a nonsense argument.
sinistar99 3 years ago
1&2. You're now stipulating that law enforcement is necessary to everyone. Good. More common ground. Everyone needs it, and everyone recognizes it. (You don't really have to explain the various entities to me. Just know that which one uses is dependent upon community choice in a vote and has consequential costs). Conversely, not all need or want healthcare. But you want all of us to pay for it anyway. Therefore: your comparison is "silly".
InvestigatorDave 3 years ago